Tuesday, June 25, 2013

The recent county hearing regarding the proposed sale of the
Montevue/Citizens properties offered the perfect opportunity to draw distinctions
between the voluntary and the coercive options at hand. The opponents of the sale were organized in
the usual manner when these types of decisions are before a government body.
First, the “customers” of the service being considered are trotted out in the
beginning of the hearing with truly heartbreaking stories of dire need. Then
the “experts” are assembled - in this case the leftist politicians and Board of
Trustees current and former - to testify about the need being genuine and the
financial costs being worthwhile. Lastly the staff which almost always consist
of public employee union members are lined up to talk about how they love the
job so much and do such a good job and are so dedicated that it could never be
duplicated in the free market. The primary tone of each person testifying in
favor of the government service is that the only motivations of those opposing
them are criminal cruelty to the needy and/or outright corruption.

The possibility of the exact opposite being the case is
never entertained, because these tactics have for so long worked so brilliantly
that nearly no one questions them anymore. And who could stand up under the
withering attack by the special interest group vilifying their opponents as
heartless and mean if not “on the take”.Particularly disheartening are the despicable lies that the organizers
tell the “customers” of these services. The specific scare-mongering for these
residents was the story that they would literally be thrown out on the street
if this sale occurred which was not true in any sense. The typical union
bullying and social pressure started before the event even started out in front
of the venue and online.Hurling vile
insults via facebook and other social media at all those who oppose their
obviously righteous campaign, the opponents of the sale accused the proponents
of wanting to throw grandma of the cliff once again.During the staff testimony section, a union
member (in the form of “testifying”) performed the tired role of outing the
opposition by asking for a show of hands of who is for and who is against in
order to poison the well for the eventual testimony of the proponents of the
sale so the organized will know who to boo a priori.

What goes unsaid too often is that the better way to care
for these needy is by direct and voluntary charity rather than the government
coercion and the force of tax law. Even
less said is the fact that the morally bankrupt position is in fact the one
held by the folks who want to use the police power of the government to enforce
stealing from the many to enrich the few.This modern day robinhoodism is a thin veil hiding the real corrupt
party in these hearings. These public employee labor unions always operate on an
inherent conflict of interest. They take dues from their members who are
government employees in order to lobby the government to give more pay and benefit
for the workers over and above what the market would bear in the voluntary
sector. But moreover, they lobby to add dues-paying members to their numbers
through an increase in government positions which always leads to higher taxes
for the fewer and fewer left holding check. The truly heartless in the room
were those using the elderly as props to continue the theft of that which they
cannot or will not compete for in the voluntary sector.Instead of honestly querying their families, friends,
neighbors, co-workers, businesses, faith communities, and civic organizations
for voluntary donations for this very worthy cause, they choose short cuts and
the way of violence. They choose to use the police power of the state.

We heard over and over again during the hearing that the
buyer was a for-profit company, and that that means the elderly will go uncared
for. These folks refuse to or can’t understand that the best service is always
rendered by the market for the price. The price is always lower when the
government stays out of that market meaning that the charitable have less cost
to cover and is therefore more efficient in meeting the needs of the truly
needed. This brings us to the next feature of voluntary care for the elderly or
whatever other government service that is unnecessary. The truly needed are
cared for and not the free-rider due to personal accountability which is the
hallmark of direct and voluntary charity. A nameless, faceless government
cannot and will not be able to distinguish between the two.

The best, most efficient and effective means of supporting
the neediest in our communities is always through voluntary association. This
is also the only virtuous action with regards to caring for people. When we
advocate for government to take care of charity by socializing the cost across
the entire taxpaying population, it is shirking our responsibility as
individuals and as a community.

Tuesday, June 11, 2013

Our speaker this month was an economic adviser on Ron Paul's congressional staff! Lydia Mashburn will give a short presentation on the Federal Reserve and money in the United States.

We'll have an update on policy at the Federal level, and spend a little more time on our Bill of Rights series this meeting, covering the crucial 10th amendment, which limits the Federal government to those powers stated in the Constitution.

We'll have a book review of Weapons of Mass Instruction by John Gatto, and a final collection of liberty books and materials for our upcoming library donation.